Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs MiniMax M2.1

GPT-6.1 Sol leads MiniMax M2.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 51.8 to 20.9, and MiniMax M2.1 costs 8.3x less per output token ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 12 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI
Coding
82.4
Overall
81.4
Output $/M
$10.00
12
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
0
vs boards won of 12 shared

GPT-6.1 Sol or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick MiniMax M2.1 for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million).

Shared results
12
GPT-6.1 Sol only
91
MiniMax M2.1 only
22
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-6.1 Sol 82.4 from 5 benchmarks, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 70.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GPT-6.1 Sol 2743.8 against MiniMax M2.1 623.8, 70.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Sol $10.00 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 8.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Sol takes 1.05M tokens, MiniMax M2.1 205K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-6.1 SolBarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
Knowledge10
Web design60
General20
All shared boards120
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
LiveBench coding96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev1753Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)55.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)88.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Code migration (Vals AI)65.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
IOI (Vals AI)96.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)43.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)39.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured81.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SciCode55.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured28.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
FrontierCode50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ALE-Bench2743.8623.8GPT-6.1 Sol
LMArena Text: coding1478Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1476Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: React1754Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1800Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1702Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SciCode9.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SWE-Bench Pro V296.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index51.820.9GPT-6.1 Sol
Epoch Capabilities Index168.4Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1307Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1224Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Design Arena: spreadsheets1270Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench research83.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench browser88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench long agentic73.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SREBench (Vals AI)50.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)52.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)38.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)70.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)52.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Vals Science Index59.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)28.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured85.4%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
APEX-Agents60.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SpireClimb24.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveBench reasoning92.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)46.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)52.9%23.2%GPT-6.1 Sol
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)95.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI98.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ARC-AGI-294.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Chess puzzles68.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Mystery game puzzles80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
EBR-bench54.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1463Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: expert1489Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1465Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1306Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: homework1356Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
AIMENot measured77.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured89.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured87.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured82.7Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured82.7%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 393.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FrontierMath, tier 4100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
ProofBench99.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: math1489Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1513Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MathArena84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.0%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured75.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured55.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured58.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured66.3%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured91.2%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)48.8%34.1%GPT-6.1 Sol
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured87.5%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: science1444Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1433Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1471Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1445Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite75.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
PRBench Finance46.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
PRBench Legal47.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websites13211201GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: UI components13231220GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: game dev13931134GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: data viz12861206GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: 3D14581164GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: all code categories13461190GPT-6.1 Sol
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1131Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveBench design82.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
Vals Index63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LiveBench data analysis82.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)59.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
SAGE (Vals AI)46.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.5%80.8%GPT-6.1 Sol
IFBenchNot measured69.9%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.0%67.7%GPT-6.1 Sol
DTBench96.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMCA62.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Furniture assembly80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text1443Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1466Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1425Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision1288Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: English1450Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: non-English1433Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1487Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: French1460Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1439Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: Russian1457Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1442Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1458Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1444Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1426Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: English1274Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1289Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
MultiChallenge82.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Sol measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.0070Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.130Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Sol$0.500Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-6.1 Sol and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 SolMiniMax M2.1
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 29, 2026December 23, 2025
Context window1.05M205K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.30
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.20
Coding index82.4Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it51
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Only GPT-6.1 Sol has a coding score, 82.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; MiniMax M2.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick MiniMax M2.1 for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($1.20 vs $10.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-6.1 Sol or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-6.1 Sol, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Sol vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

12 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-6.1 Sol's coding index rests on 5 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next